Sri R.V.S.S.Midhun Teja

O.S.No.232 of 2021Page 1 of 6Date: 18-03-2024

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, AT KOLLAPUR.

Monday, the 18th day of March, Two thousand and Twenty Four.

PRESENT:- Sri. R.V.S.S MIDHUN TEJA, II Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Kollapur.

Original Suit No.232 of 2021

Between:

1.Mudavath Sangda S/o Roop Sing, Age:65 years, Occ: Agriculture

2.Mudavath Chandru S/o Shakru, age:38 years, Occ: Agriculture

3.Mudavath Sevalal S/o Lokya, age:22 years, Occ: Agriculture

4.Mudavath Somani W/o Bojjya Age:50 years, Occ: Agriculture (All are R/o Mukkidigundam Village of Kollapur Mandal of Nagarkurnool District) ….Plaintiffs

Versus

1.Yetham Mashanna S/o Balaiah, age: 50 years,Occ: Agriculture

2.Yetham Shiva S/o Mashanna, age:28 years, Occ: Agriculture

3.Yetham Ramakrishna S/o Balaswamy, age : 32 years, Occ: Agriculture (All are R/o Mukkidigundam Village of Kollapur Mandal of Nagarkurnool District )

….. Defendants

This suit is coming up before me on 13-03-2024 for final hearing in the presence of Sri V.V.Srinivasa Rao, Counsel for the plaintiffs and the Defendants have been set exparte and upon perusing the material papers on record and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following:

:: J U D G M E N T ::

1.This is a suit filed for perpetual injunction against the Defendants restraining them, their agents, servants and workmen from interfering with the possession of the plaintiffs over the suit land bearing Sy.No.99/A (Old) measuring Ac.3-34 guntas

O.S.No.232 of 2021Page 2 of 6Date: 18-03-2024

i.e., land bearing Sy.No.99/U/1/1/1 extent 0.38.75 guntas of plaintiff No.1,

Sy.No.99/U/1/1/2 extent 0-38.25 guntas of plaintiff No.2, Sy.No.99/U/1/2 extent 0- 38.75 of plaintiff No.3 and Sy.No.99/U/2 extent 0-38.25 guntas of Plaintiff No.4 situated in limits of Molachinthapally village of Kollapur Mandal.

2.The brief averments of the plaint is that the plaintiff is having three more brothers, namely Mudavath Shakru, the father of plaintiff No.2, Mudavath Lokya, the father of Plaintiff No.3 and Mudavath Bojjya the husband of the plaintiff No.4 respectively. The plaintiff No.1 and his brothers jointly purchased the land bearing

Sy.No.99 (old) measuring about Ac.5-00 situated in the limits of Molachinthapally village of Kollapur Mandal for a consideration of Rs.6,000/- under a registered sale deed, dated.15-05-1981, vide D.No.791/81 from one Yetham Balaiah, the father of the defendant No.1 and grandfather of the Defendants No.2 and 3, but while executing the registered sale deed, the document was got executed in the name of the plaintiff No.1 alone representing his joint family consisting of himself and his brothers. The said Yetham Balaiah, the father of the Defendant No.1 also sold the said land as Kartha of his joint family consisting of himself and his children for his joint family necessity and also delivered the possession the said land to the plaintiff

No.1. But after demarcation, the said purchased land was found to be in an extent of

Ac.3-34 guntas only, which is hereinafter called as suit land. As such said Ac.3-34 guntas was only mutated in the name of the plaintiff No.1 in the revenue records as owner and pattadar by allotting the Sy.No.99/A.

3.Thereafter the suit land was got mutated in the names of the plaintiffs as per their joint family wishes. Thus the plaintiff No.1 is the owner & possessor of land bearing Sy.No.99/U/1/1/1 extent 0-38.75 guntas, the plaintiff No.2 is the owner &

O.S.No.232 of 2021Page 3 of 6Date: 18-03-2024

possessor of the land bearing Sy.No.99/U/1/1/2 extent 0-38.25 guntas, the plaintiff

No.3 is the owner & possessor of the land Sy.No.99/U/1/2 extent 0-38.25 guntas and the plaintiff No.4 is the owner and possessor of the land bearing Sy.No.99/U/2 extent 0-38.25 guntas, totally measuring Ac.3-34 guntas situated situated in the limits of

Molachinthapally village of Kollapur Mandal. Thus the plaintiffs have been jointly cultivating the entire suit and measuring Ac.3-34 guntas in the old Sy.No.99/A in one compact block and are in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the suit land till today without interruption from what so ever from anybody.

4.That the plaintiffs, who have no right or authority over the suit land of the plaintiffs, came over to the suit land on 10-07-2021 and tried to stop the ploughs of the plaintiffs, when the plaintiffs were ploughing the suit land and tried to occupy the suit land, but the plaintiffs did not allow them to do so. The defendants went away on that day threatening the plaintiffs that they will come again on another day with large number of people and occupy the suit land. The defendants are bent upon violence and the plaintiffs are unable to resist the illegal acts of the defendants. If the Defendants are not restraining by an order of the court permanently, there is every likely-hood of dispossession of the plaintiffs from the suit land at any moment.

So the plaintiffs are entitled to sue the defendants and the defendants are liable to be sued. Hence, the suit.

5.Though the summons were duly served to the defendants No.1 to 3, the defendants No.1 to 3 called and absent and hence the defendants No.1 to 3 are set exparte.

6.Heard learned counsel for plaintiff and Perused the Record.

O.S.No.232 of 2021Page 4 of 6Date: 18-03-2024

7. Now the points for determination are:-

1. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled for perpetual injunction against the Defendants restraining them, their agents, servants and workmen from interfering with the possession of the plaintiffs over the suit land bearing Sy.No.99/A (Old) measuring Ac.3-34 guntas i.e., land bearing Sy.No.99/U/1/1/1 extent 0.38.75 guntas of plaintiff No.1, Sy.No.99/U/1/1/2 extent 0-38.25 guntas of plaintiff No.2, Sy.No.99/U/1/2 extent 0-38.75 of plaintiff No.3 and Sy.No.99/U/2 extent 0-38.25 guntas of Plaintiff No.4

situated in limits of Molachinthapally village of Kollapur Mandal?

2. To what relief?

POINT NO:1:-

8.The plaintiff No.1 in support of his case examined himself as PW1 and filed his chief affidavit in lieu of his chief examination by reiterating the contents of the plaint and got marked Ex.A1 to A.14.

9.Ex.A.1 is registered sale deed, dated.15-05-1981, Ex.A.2 is true extract of the

Pahani for the year 2001-2002, Ex.A.3 is true extract of the Pahani for the year 2014,

Ex.A.4 is Pattadhar-cum-Title deed Pass book of Plaintiff No.1, Ex.A.5 is Specimen copy of Pattadhar and title deed Pass book, dated.17-02-2021, Ex.A.6 is specimen copy of ROR/1-B Namoona dated.03-07-2021, Ex.A.7 is Pattadhar-cum-Title deed pass book of plaintiff No.2, Ex.A.8 is specimen copy of Pattadhar-cum-Title deed pass book dated.17-02-2021, Ex.A.9 is specimen copy of ROR/1-B Namoona dated.05-07-2021,

Ex.A.10 is specimen copy of Pattadhar-cum-Title deed passbook, dated.07-07-2020,

Ex.A.11 is specimen copy of ROR/1-B Namoona dated.05-07-2021, Ex.A.12 is

Pattadhar-cum-Title deed pass book of plaintiff No.4, Ex.A.13 is specimen copy of

Pattadhar-cum-Title deed pass book, dated.20-06-2018, Ex.A.14 is specimen copy of

ROR/1-B Namoona dated.05-07-2021.. Thus the Ex.A1 to A14 shows that the plaintiff is the owner of the suit schedule property. The case of the plaintiff is remained

O.S.No.232 of 2021Page 5 of 6Date: 18-03-2024

unchallenged and unrebutted by the defendants No.1 to 3. Therefore the plaintiff is entitled for relief of perpetual injunction over the suit schedule property as prayed for.

Thus , point No.1 is answered accordingly.

POINT NO:2:-

10. In the result, the suit is decreed with costs in favour of the plaintiff and

against the Defendants restraining them, their agents, servants and workmen

from interfering with the possession of the plaintiffs over the suit land bearing

Sy.No.99/A (Old) measuring Ac.3-34 guntas i.e., land bearing Sy.No.99/U/1/1/1

extent 0.38.75 guntas of plaintiff No.1, Sy.No.99/U/1/1/2 extent 0-38.25 guntas

of plaintiff No.2, Sy.No.99/U/1/2 extent 0-38.75 of plaintiff No.3 and

Sy.No.99/U/2 extent 0-38.25 guntas of Plaintiff No.4 situated in limits of

Molachinthapally village of Kollapur Mandal.

Typed to my direct dictation on computer to Smt. M. Madhavi, Field Assistant, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court this the 18th day of March, 2024.

Sd/-

II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kollapur.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses examined

For the Plaintiff Forthe Defendant

PW.1Mudavath Sangada -NONE-

Documents marked

For the Plaintiff For the defendant

Ex.A1:Registered sale deed, dated.15-05-1981 -NONE-

Ex.A2 True extract of the Pahani for the year 2001- 2002

O.S.No.232 of 2021Page 6 of 6Date: 18-03-2024

Ex.A3 True extract of the Pahani for the year 2014 Ex.A4 Pattadhar-cum-Title deed Pass book of Plaintiff No.1 Ex.A5 Specimen copy of Pattadhar and title deed Pass book, dated.17-02-2021 Ex.A6 Specimen copy of ROR/1-B Namoona dated.03-07-2021 Ex.A7 Pattadhar-cum-Title deed pass book of plaintiff No.2 Ex.A8 Specimen copy of Pattadhar-cum-Title deed pass book dated.17-02-2021 Ex.A9 Specimen copy of ROR/1-B Namoona dated.05-07-2021 Ex.A10 is specimen copy of Pattadhar-cum-Title deed passbook, dated.07-07-2020 Ex.A11 Specimen copy of ROR/1-B Namoona dated.05-07-2021 Ex.A12 Pattadhar-cum-Title deed pass book of plaintiff No.4 Ex.A13 Specimen copy of Pattadhar-cum-Title deed pass book, dated.20-06-2018 Ex.A14Specimen copy of ROR/1-B Namoona dated.05-07-2021.

Sd/-

II Additional Junior Civil Judge,

KOLLAPUR.

IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT KOLLAPUR.

On this the 16thday of October, 2024

Present: Sri.R.V.S.S Midhun Teja,

II Addl. Junior Civil Judge,Kollapur.

O.S.No. 177 of 2024

Between:

Kadapani Chandramma @ Juturi Chandramma, W/o Balaswamy, age 50 yrs, occ: Agriculture, r/o Nizamabad Village of Pangal Mandal.

...Plaintiff

A N D

1.Kadapani Krishnaiah, S/o Chandraiah, age 46 yrs,

2.Kadapani Bheemudu, S/o Chandraiah, age 44 yrs,

3.Kadapani Paramesh, S/o Chandraiah, age 42 yrs,

4.Kadapani Sateesh, S/o Chandraiah, age 40 yrs, All occ: Agriculture, R/o Mylaram Village of Kodair Mandal. …Defendants

CLAIM: Suit for perpetual injunction.

This suit is coming before me for final disposal in the presence of Sri.T.Shiva Reddy, Advocate for the plaintiff and Sri.V.V.Srinivasa Rao, Advocate for the defendants and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following order :

DOCKET ORDER, DT: 06 .10.2024

Plaintiff called present. Plaintiff stated that she is not

interested to proceed with the case and she already compromised

the matter with the Defendants and endorsed the same on petition

and the same was identified by the plaintiff counsel. Plaintiff

counsel stated that the plaintiff is not interested to proceed with

petition and intends to withdrawn the petition, because the case

was compromised by the plaintiff against all Defendants and hence

the case may be dismissed as not pressed and the same was

endorsed by the plaintiff counsel on the suit. Hence the suit is

dismissed as not pressed, in the interest of justice.

Given under my hand and seal of the Court, this the 06th day of October, 2024.

Sd/-

For I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kollapur. FAC II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kollapur.